RE: Mailboxes behaviour
- From: "Fox, Kevin M" <KMFox mail bhi-erc com>
- To: "'Richard Hult'" <rhult hem2 passagen se>, "'Jesse D . Sightler'" <jsight pair com>, "'balsa-list gnome org'" <balsa-list gnome org>
- Subject: RE: Mailboxes behaviour
- Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 15:44:39 -0700
If this is the case, there is something else to consider:
Do we need the bars on the sides? Would it be better to just have all the
tabs up to begin with?
They could me made to order and put an icon on each tab...
just some food for thaught....
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Hult [SMTP:rhult@hem2.passagen.se]
> Sent: Friday, April 09, 1999 3:40 PM
> To: Fox, Kevin M; 'Jesse D . Sightler'; 'balsa-list@gnome.org'
> Subject: RE: Mailboxes behaviour
>
>
> >I think it works this way because it loads tabs for each thing.. If you
> >notice, there are tabs up at the top when you open more then one box.
> then
> >if you want to change, you just click on a tab....
> >I dont know if this is the best way of doing it thow....
>
> I just think it's a bit weird that you have two ways of bringing a mailbox
> up. The first time you have to double-click the tree, then after that you
> can either click the tab or double-click the tree.
>
> If you want to close a box, you have to use the tree.
>
> I would remove the tabs altogether if I was in charge... Personally I
> think
> it would be most easy to use if you just needed to click on the tree once
> to bring up a certain mailbox.
>
> The problem with the tabs is that they are not ordered like the ones in
> the
> tree. The tree is always the same and you can open the right mailbox with
> your eyes closed (almost, but you get my point :). It's simply so much
> more
> easy to navigate around a tree than the tabs. All IMHO of course.
>
> Richard
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]